Argentina 1-1 Bolivia: Batista tries two systems but neither works well as Bolivia grab point

July 2, 2011

The starting line-ups

Bolivia took the lead at the start of the second half, but Sergio Aguero’s thumping volley rescued a draw for the hosts in the opening Copa America game.

Sergio Batista’s main decision was whether to start Carlos Tevez or Angel di Maria on the left of his front three. He went for Tevez. Marco Rojo got the nod at left-back, and Sergio Romero started in goal.

The stars here were Bolivia, of course, but all the tactical interest came from Argentina’s two systems.

Quinteros’ formation was extremely effective but also very simple – a defensive-minded shape with two narrow banks of four, trying to make it difficult for Argentina to play through them.

Argentina wide forwards

Just as in South Africa last summer, Tevez has forced his way into the side despite seemingly being out of the coach’s intended first XI shortly before the tournament started. He was asked to play as a left-sided forward here.

Tevez generally played narrower and was less effective at trying to stretch the Bolivia defence, which wanted to be narrow. They were also happy to play reasonably high up the pitch, however. Although one defender often came out to meet Messi, the full-backs tucked in to prevent the centre of the pitch opening up. They also had the pacey Ronaldo Rivero to cover, and besides, there was often no Argentina player looking to exploit the space anyway.

That problem was related to the role of Banega, who did a decent job with the ball at his feet connecting midfield and attack, but was cautious with his movement off the ball. When Messi plays in the centre and drops deep he attracts two or three players to him, opening up space for an attacking midfielder to exploit – at club level, most frequently Andres Iniesta. Banega remained quite deep, however, and there was no real need for him to do so with both Javier Mascherano and Esteban Cambiasso in that zone, plus no real driving runs from midfield from Bolivia.

Another difference between Argentina and Barcelona, in relation to Messi (it must be said that comparing Batista’s side to the greatest club side in the world and arguably one of the best of all time is extremely harsh, but since replicating those conditions for Messi has been one of his main goals, the comparison must be made) is the fact that Argentina don’t press anything like as much as Barca, and the wide players instead drop back when they lose possession. That leaves Messi as the highest player up the pitch in a 4-1-4-1ish shape, which prevents quick combinations between he and the two wide forwards on the break.

Second half

Batista switched to 4-2-1-3 for the second half

All of this meant that Batista immediately turned to his plan B at half time, a 4-2-1-3. Cambiasso was removed, with Angel di Maria on as a left-winger, and Tevez becoming a centre-forward. Messi moved deeper, behind the three forwards.

The issue is then about Messi’s positioning – he appeared too deep, generally picking the ball up deeper than the two Bolivia holding players, forced away from goal by Tevez’s presence. Just as Tevez rather got in Messi’s way and forced him too deep against Argentina last year as a second striker, he was broadly doing the same thing as the main central striker here. What kind of player would Messi want to play behind in this system? Tevez, a false nine at club level, is probably not the best option.

Amongst all this, something far more important happened – Bolivia scored from their first real attempt of the game, as Rojas flicked in a corner kick at the near post, and Banega miscued the ball over the line. Bolivia could then sit deeper, with Rojas dropping off as more of a fifth midfielder and pressuring Argentina’s two holders.

Argentina pushed up, which exposed the lack of pace of their centre-backs, something that will surely be exploited at some point in this tournament. Here, we had a brief glimpse of it – Moreno had all the time he liked with a one-on-one against Romero, but wasted the chance.

Batista had already reached for his alternative shape, and so had to stay with that same system. Sergio Aguero came on for Lavezzi and had an instant impact – superbly volleying home after Nicolas Burdisso had gone forward for a free-kick. That raised another question – whether Argentina needed a proper number nine who could, like Burdisso, be an aerial threat in the box.

Argentina rallied late on, but Bolivia defended well and were content to do the basics as Argentina struggled to work out their best system.

Conclusion

The tactical decision-making and the actual game were almost two different things here. Both goals came from set-plays – and from (a) a mistake on the line and (b) a brilliant finish, rather than any great example of combination play.

The match further outlined how many attacking options Batista has – Diego Milito, Gonzalo Higuain and Javier Pastore weren’t used at all – but provides more questions than answers. Tevez and Messi in the same team appears to be a problem unless their relationship improves significantly, and it would be a surprise if Batista starts against Colombia with the same team that played here.

73 Responses to “ Argentina 1-1 Bolivia: Batista tries two systems but neither works well as Bolivia grab point ”

Company men on July 2, 2011 at 3:44 pm

I think Messi is better deployed in the midfield, creating play from deep for Argentina; a Xavi-esque player. Argentina has TONS of forwards yet no really credible playmaker who is able to make through balls from deep; and Messi has more than enough flair to do it. Just a thought

Damn three defensive midfielders but where is Pastore? Could you explain Batista’s exclusion of Pastore, ZM?

Completely agree company men, the exclusion of Pastore is totally beyond me. I can’t see the sense in playing multiple holding midfield players against a team that is only interested in bunkering down and defending. A player like Pastore has the guile and creativity that Mascherano and Cambiasso lack, something which might have helped Argentina break through Bolivia.

I noticed during the Gold Cup that the United States were fixated with the defensive midfield partnership of Bradley and Jones, persisting with it even against teams like Guadaloupe. Is this tendency to go with a defensive midfield at international tournaments just nervousness and a lack of ambition, or is is some kind of sophisticated tactical ploy I am failing to pick up on?

Anonymous on July 2, 2011 at 5:44 pm

ZM makes a good point regarding Banega. I think he has enough skill to exploit that open space. He’s fantastic with ball retention and linking up in midfield but seems to lack a bit of confidence when there’s space to run and finding the final through ball.

Him and Pastore would be perfect partners.

matt on July 2, 2011 at 5:57 pm

Agreed. If Argentina persist in a 4-3-3, I think a Mascherano/Banega/Pastore trio would work very well. It’s a textbook destroyer, passer/box to box player, and playmaker midfield. With Barcelona, both Xavi and Iniesta are willing and able to run into the box beyond Messi (most notably in Barcelona 3-1 Arsenal and Barcelona 5-1 Shakhtar). Argentina’s midfield might be less spectacular than the Barcelona variety (and necessarily so), but it would be an improvement on the stolid trio of holders.

marc on July 2, 2011 at 6:09 pm

Banega-Pastore my choice as well, but do you think its better to use Cambiasso in midfield and maybe shift Mascherano to CB position like Barca did in later part of the season?I know Javier is not the best choice for defense but that is not a position Argentina is showing great promise with their regular customers either.

DOF on July 2, 2011 at 11:23 pm

I agree Mascherano as a CB and Cambiasso as CDM.

Sir Bow on July 3, 2011 at 8:34 am

Mascherano at CB, you’re right, maybe this will work.
Just kick Milito, so Burdisso’s Strength and Mascherano’s Work rate will make an unique combination.
I’m looking forward for Colombian match

Josef on July 6, 2011 at 2:56 pm

As ZM mentions, the Milito/Burdisso pairing is slow as molasses, so maybe this would be a good idea.

HUH? on July 4, 2011 at 6:25 am

Where are you guys getting this from? Pastore is not a “playmaker.” He is more of a dynamic player who often drops deep and to the left to receive the ball. He is talented but not polished and often fades in and out of games – not on the same level as the other Argentinan midfielders

Sir Bow on July 5, 2011 at 8:16 am

Yes, i know that, but the problem’s here is to make argentina midfielder more attacking mind. Having 3 DM in the middle was bad strategy, maybe you must see Ryan giggs at MU in MC position, he did well. I think Pastore could make better argentina than this time.

Jimmy on July 2, 2011 at 3:46 pm

I don’t think the rest of the team really understood Messi. The rest of the team were almost playing too direct when they were in Bolivia’s half of the pitch. And yet, when I saw them against USA earlier this year, they were amazing in the first half. It was like watching Barcelona almost, but they were so slow with possession in this match. They created nothing from playing good, apart from one chance in the first half which Cambiasso scuffed.
Good analyses.

Thought Bolivia were given plenty of chances to counter, if they’d had a little more composure they could’ve had a second goal at one point in the second half. Argentina will struggle not to concede against more convincing opponents.

pios on July 2, 2011 at 4:00 pm

If Batista wants to replicate the conditions at Barcelona, why not play Messi on the right wing as he used to there? That way Tevez can still play in the centre without getting in Messi’s way.

It is a decent idea that I considered while watching the game as well, but Messi has always played poor for Argentina on the wing, usually because Zanetti is no Dani Alves, but also because the side lacks creativity if he gets stranded there. Bringing Pastore into the side and playing Tevez as a false nine with Aguero or Lavezzi on the left seems like an effective way of Emulating Barça’s system but the biggest issue is the midfield creativity. Messi was ‘poor’ (as the media described him) because he was playing deeper than he liked. banega and Cambiasso are no xavi and iniesta

3rnald0 on July 2, 2011 at 4:57 pm

then he wouldnt be replicating barca if messi was right wing as messi plays through the centre.

Anonymous on July 2, 2011 at 5:43 pm

Yeah, but he doesn’t play in the center with an idiot named Tevez standing motionless in front of him. Actually he did for a bit with Ibra and that’s when Barca always played worse.

Batista said Messi was his #9. Well, then why the hell was he dropping deep to take a pass from Burdisso and try to replicate the Getafe goal? What a joke.

pios on July 2, 2011 at 7:33 pm

I did say “as he used to”. The right wing used to be his standard position at Barcelona.

3rnald0 on July 2, 2011 at 7:53 pm

although messi is easier to nullify in the right wing role , as mourinho proved.

The biggest question moving forward for Argentina seems to be creativity in midfield. If their was ever a time that Barcelona struggled this year, It was when Xavi and Iniesta were unable to create and Messi was forced deeper than he would like to be playing. Surely with Cambiasso and Banega replacing probably the two best players at their position in the world this lack of creativity is going to arrive far more often. Banega can play the Xavi position reasonably well but I feel that, at least against the lesser teams in the tournament, Pastore should be starting in midfield with Cambiasso holding and Mascherano at center back. This would sort out more than a few problems for the Argentines. This 4-2-3-1 may benefit Argentina as a whole because it offers more natural width (they have no fullbacks to match alves) and creativity from midfield but at the cost of Messi and defensive support which is something they need.

…would probably be a better option but it does ask more of Pastore than he would probably like. It is a shame that Lavezzi played so poor given the good positions he got into and his understanding. He seemed constantly frustrated throughout the first half by the referee’s decision which didn’t seem particularly bad or decisive. (He yelled for quite a while over Bolivia getting a throw instead of Argentina) Another thing I noticed was Cambiasso’s positioning in the first half, He seemed to get in the box and occupy the centerbacks of Bolivia quite often when the ball went wide, usually higher than Messi when this happened.

Jesse on July 2, 2011 at 4:24 pm

Agree with Pios: The effectiveness of Tevez, at least @ City, depends on everyone else having pretty well-defined roles. Tevez and Messi like to occupy the same space, which sort of throws everyone else off. And Tevez on the wing is a waste. Also, I was surprised by the lack of pressing by Arg — half of Tevez’s effectiveness is that he has limitless energy to harass the back 4, leading to them giving away possession.

Very interesting that Mascherano would drop back to become the 3rd CB — almost a 3-3-1-3 at times it seemed.

Finally, was it me, or did it seem like Cambiasso was the CF in the first half? Very odd tactics.

I completely agree. The Cambiasso of today’s game reminded me of what he did under Leonardo, something very different to how Mourinho would use him. I guess it was Cambiasso who was taking up the space that Messi would create when dropping back, taking two defenders with him, instead of Banega.

3rnald0 on July 2, 2011 at 4:33 pm

ZM what happened to the switzerland vs spain u21 final u said you were gunna do?!

BA on July 2, 2011 at 4:46 pm

Mascherano-Banega
- Pastore -
— Messi —
Lavezzi — Kun

is the way it has to be. Pastore is capable both of making those attacking, Iniesta-esque runs ZM mentioned and playing 1-2s with Messi around the edge of the box. Lavezzi and Kun are both powerful, dangerously skillful players who can stretch a defense by their mere presence, if told to play wider to allow Messi more space through the center (effectively as inverted wingers, much the way Villa and Pedro are used at Barcelona). everyone knows that the team has to revolve around Messi; why Batista insists on throwing up Tevez, a huge infringement upon Messi’s game, i simply don’t understand. Cambiasso, likewise, there is simply no room for in a midfield that needs to be far more creative with the available players than Argentina showed in this match.

the first name on the teamsheet is that of the best player in the world, in his best position; then work from there. 2 coaches for Argentina now have apparently failed to understand a concept so simple every football fan on the planet gets it.

marc on July 3, 2011 at 7:06 pm

I doubt if Batista has the ‘choice’ of the infringement you mentioned. Its a real shame because most opinions about Argentina I come up across online suggests the use of Pastore and/or Kun in the starting 11, but the mass crowd that fills the seats have a totally different ‘opinion’. And being the prima-donna that we all know he is, I really dont believe he has a healthy contribution in the dressing room as well. The coach really has to show guts and call a spade a spade irrespective of the amount of pressure he has to endure.

I’m surprised you haven’t mentioned the immobile Argentine Full backs. For Barcelona, Messi is allowed to start on the wing and spend the majority of the game in the centre because Alves is happy pushing forward as an extra forward. For Argentina – Batista realises that Zanetti isn’t going to attack as often and is therefore left with the headache of playing a winger who will stay out wide(Lavezzi) to give width AND accommodate Messi in the middle of the park.

I noticed from last nights game,where Cambiasso and Messi were often getting in each others way as the attacking playing of Argentina struggled up the centre of the pitch via Messi without any wide support from either Fullback and much of the play came to a stalemate when Messi passed out wide to Lavezzi and Tevez leaving them in a dead end with multiple defenders to deal with, and no support.

Maybe Batista should realize that since he has no Alves, Abidal, Pique, Iniesta…..etc. in the team, it makes no sense to try to replicate Barca. Maybe he should try to replicate Villareal instead? Or even if not Villareal, try something along those lines. False nine, Messi on the right etc. all nice, but that game and also Argentina at WC showed the problems you can have with a false 9 when the other 9 players on the field ain’t working as they should.
Zabaleta is a half decent fullback, maybe Zanetti should just play as a leftback, add maybe Pastore in midfield to play the Iniesta role and in attack, well, whatever just works but maybe it should be about maximizing your available talent. So how about Aguero up front with either Milito, Tevez or anyone else and again a kind of asymmetrical system deployed? Everything would work better than trying to copy Barcelona when you don’t have the right players.

marc on July 2, 2011 at 5:13 pm

ZM, on the comparison with the barca line up: do you think employing Banega in an Iniesta-esque (like the “opening up space for an attacking midfielder to exploit” you mentioned) role is the correct way to go? I consider Ever more as a box-to-box type midfielder, but with the special quality of ability to function as deep lying playmaker (and perhaps he can be labelled ‘underrated’ considering the class he shows on his best form). Therefore, it seems starting with both Mascherano and Cambiasso alongside with Banega makes the midfield static at times. Do you think it would be better to let Banega do what he does best, i.e. pulling strings from the deep (Xavi-esque in Barca comparison).Also would it be better to field any one of the Dms and introduce Pastore as the third midfielder who is actually quiet good in both triggering counter attacks and (while perhaps not as good as Iniesta in his off the ball movement and assist in the defense) is quiet good in maintaing position as well with good ball control and ability to dictate the tempo?

And I agree Tevez inclusion into the 4-3-3 does coincide with Messi’s comfort zone in the game. Fielding Lavezzi on the right does not help either. Kun and Di Maria with their free flowing/ good link-up capability and crossing abilities respectively seems to be the best options.

the best striker on the planet (with etoo) and the best player on the planet on the bench

you can put them in milito and pastore role if you want, the idea is the same: play with 2 central strikers and rely on mascherano’s defense to allow the wingbacks to go forward a lot

matt on July 2, 2011 at 5:48 pm

I just don’t think a strikerless system is workable in International football. Teams just don’t have time to develop the cohesion required to play without a reference striker. Barcelona can manage without a true center forward because their entire team is willing to make runs into the box (confident that either possession will be maintained or cover will close the gap they leave), and they have the combination play to slice through even the most defensive 9 man defensive blocks. Their massive possession dominance also gives Messi the chance to get into the box, which he really doesn’t for Argentina (he’s limited to long shots mostly)

I’d run a standard 4-2-3-1 with the same back four (an underwhelming unit, but the best Argentina can muster), Banega and Mascherano as holders (Banega given more license to advance), an attacking midfield line of Messi, Di Maria, and Aguero/Pastore, and the target man Milito/Higuain.

Kane Prior on July 2, 2011 at 5:59 pm

I would argue that the only part he has got right here is the front three’s positions and movement, I thought messi, tevez and lavezzi played well. It was the rest of the team that is flawed. The back two has no pace, which argentina desperately need (mascherano at the back?)
They lack any good attacking fullbacks, a must in modern football so the wdie forwards didnt get as much space as they could have had. And the midfield three was unbalanced, there should always be a passer, destroyer and attacker and there wasnt an attacker as written by ZM. I think both cambiasso and banega werent needed and seemed to do the same job, pick one and play a more attacking midfielder (pastore?) But argentina do lack a world class centre back, attacking fullback and creative midfielder.

Also i saw a picture of you on one of your links to other pages

Alvaro on July 2, 2011 at 7:03 pm

Argentina should drop Lavezzi and Tevez and put Pastore and Aguero.
Pastore should play the position Messi played in the second half.

The problem is that no Argentina coach has had the balls to drop Tevez.

123 kid on July 2, 2011 at 7:11 pm

the biggest problem for argentina is that they play too static. other than messi, the other 9 players dont move around at all and this results in them playing typical conservative football. Their front 3 is also way too predictable and i dont know why ZM has the fullbacks with arrows in the first pic as they didnt support the attack at all. it seems like batista is relying on his players skills to win matches, but it does not work that way. you have got to put these players in a tactic where they can use the skills that they have to win matches. Even his player selections are questionable, lavezzi is much better on the left and g. milito who hasnt played more than 10 games in 2-3 seasons ahead of garay?

I think that Diego Milito would be the best forward to play with Messi in the second system, if he were fit. However, I think this game was all nerves, Argentina got a point, and with a win and a bit of confidence they could go off on a tear.

goope on July 2, 2011 at 8:46 pm

Did Argentina try to play like Barcelona in the games before?
If yes, didn’t the coach notice that it doesn’t work?

Batista would never attempt it but it is the only way to get natural width from fullback that allows the system to work. Di Maria probably wouldn’t like it either but he has shown that he has the work rate to do it. If bastos could play fullback for Brazil, He can for Argentina. Also, their is always Cambiasso for cover who is naturally left footed so he can drop between the centerbacks or to the left of Mascherano. Tevez offers the wide player cutting in on his strong foot that Villa gives, Agüero offers the ambidexterity of Pedro on the opposite flank so he can still cut in effectively, Pastore offers the midfield drive and creativity of Iniesta and Banega offers a more calm, deep lying passing approach similar to xavi. Cambiasso can hold and Mascherano helps solve some of Argentina’s problems at the back, especially with pace. Garay is the best CB Argentina have and also the youngest quality one so him not playing is a huge surprise.

Anonymous on July 3, 2011 at 4:13 pm

Like it. Except Tevez will refuse to stay wide. He’ll drift in and eat up Messi’s space like he always does. He’s also to slow to do anything on the counter. Put Aguero on the left where he can play and Higuain/Lavezzi on the right.

Lavezzi/Agüero would be great. I don’t think Higuain would be effective in a wide role though. I prefer Tevez for his work rate defensively which is necessary to press like Barça. Pace to play on the counter should be a seconadary concern if emulating Barça is the first objective. Tevez drifting inward should be fine as long as they get width from deeper. Barça’s front three come together in the middle quite often and give the opponents center a lot of problems. This just doesn’t work with fullbacks like rojo.

Roberticus on July 4, 2011 at 4:48 am

I think you underestimate Bastos’ stamina and physique. In Brazil he spent much of his youth playing as a wing-back in a 3-5-2 for Atletico Paranaense and Figueirense, so he was well used to the physical demands of patrolling an entire flank.

Ok, you might say that playing as a wing-back is slightly different and you’d be correct; insofar as wing-backs don’t really need to develop such positional awareness as do full-backs when it comes to defending around their own goal area. But if Bastos struggled with this aspect of playing in a back-four for Brazil, imagine poor DiMaria!

In a team which plays with a back four, Bastos has said he prefers to play as a wide-ish midfielder.
DiMaria is an outside-forward (classical winger) who has learned to play as a wide midfielder for Benfica (and in the odd game for Madrid).. to me it is too big an ask of DiMaria what you are proposing, even in terms of pure stamina.

Lucas on July 2, 2011 at 10:21 pm

It’s good to note that this is the first time Tevez has played in this system, and as many of us thought beforehand he doesn’t fit at all. When Di Maria played in his place in a 4-3-3 the front line was stretched enough to let Messi work his magic (see friendly vs Portugal).

y2k156 on July 2, 2011 at 11:15 pm

I always thought Batista’s claim that Argentina would follow Barcelona way to be too ambitious and not realistic. Barcelona have followed the same philosophy for last 20 years and all their players follow same way of playing. Barca is about simple passes and space. As against that most Argentinian players are more individualistic and flair players. To teach such players new way of working takes time and no national coach is having so much time. Even Spain, with half the team from Barca, are not good as Barca so what chance does Argentina have.

Messi had to come too deep. Most of the time, he got the ball near halfway line. For Messi to be effective, he needs ball near the 18 yard line and he needs people around him who are willing to make runs and play give and go with him. Even without it, he will still be great (like yesterday) but his impact becomes limited. Yesterday Lavezzi had a shocker and Tevez is simply too selfish. I remember quite a few times when Messi passed the ball to his partners but they almost never passed the ball to him in the D or near to it. So no matter how good he is, he is not going to score goals from half way in every match. Even if he does it once a year, its already more then expected.

Two attacking players with whom Messi has best understanding are Aguero and Pastore. If Batista has any sense (which i am beginning to doubt) both of them will be in starting line up. Argentina can go with 4-2-3-1 formation with front four being Messi, Aguero, Pastore and Di Maria/Higuain. If Argies are going for it, they can have Pastore next to Masch and have another striker on. Key for this formation would be the work that the front players need to put in. Right now, except Messi rest of attackers simply do not put in adequate effort for me and in today’s football, these luxury players are disadvantage to any team.

Overall I am quite pessimistic about Argentina’s chances right now. I do not think that Batista will learn from the mistakes and i also do not have high hopes of players starting to think of team before themselves. So for me, if argentina go on to win the cup, its going to be a surprise.

Anonymous on July 3, 2011 at 12:45 am

Fantastic post.

quilmes on July 3, 2011 at 3:34 am

I agree with every paragraph. Well-said too. Great post.

A lot of people are commenting on the midfield/forward positions, yet the glaring weakness of this team is the defensive line. Watching Argentina’s play lately, I get the feeling that there are two separate units on the field, with little connection between the back line and that wealth of talented passers and finishers in front.

I’m no tactician–so it’s fine to shoot down these ideas. I’m just interested in what the tactical minds around here have to say.

What about Mascherano as a center-back, a la Champions League? And would it be insane to play Di Maria as a leftback against defensive teams like Bolivia? Is he disciplined enough? His pace would be useful in the back, and I imagine he could link the back and front well, like a poor man’s Dani Alves….no?

Mascherano has shown that he is an adept center-back, and I have to think he’s at least as good as Milito or Burdisso (Guardiola appears to agree). He knows how to play smart and quick passes out of the back, and offense starts from there, after all. If Mascherano moves back, there’s room for Cambiasso (whom I like) or and allows other midfield combinations. Let’s face it: the midfield options are much better than the defensive ones.

Finally, does anyone know what Christian Ansaldi has been doing? I haven’t observed him in awhile, but he’s been impressive every time I’ve watched him. Thanks!

Mati on July 3, 2011 at 3:39 pm

not insane at all, but in that case a back 3 system would fit best. in the 2008 olympics, Argntina played a 3-4-1-2/3-4-2-1 & 4-3-1-2 combination. the difference between now & then in my opinion is simply Juan Roman Riquelme. in this game, whenever both fullbacks advanced (rare occurance), Mascherano dropped to create something close to a 3-4-3 (3-4-1-2 if Messi dropepd) but this is just a natural reaction to the team’s overall movement not the main shape.

Ansaldi has been tried by both Diego & Checho, but for some reason he has yet to convince. I rate him, and Argentina has a general weakness in fullback positions…go figure

Alf on July 3, 2011 at 8:16 pm

-Having two defensive midfielders (Busquets, Alonso) at this level perhaps should only be attempted by Spain who have phenomenal attacking talent.

-I agree that Masch is a superior CB over Milito. (He handled Manchester United just fine)

-Di Maria, although he has the potential to be an outstanding LB and could probably do well against lesser teams, would probably make critical errors against Uruguay, Brazil, etc. due to lack of experience.

-If Argie had more time they could really become a strong team. For now, they have too many glaring weaknesses and lack of team fluidity.

-The key to their success will be how to utilize Messi effectively (and finish the chances he creates), wherever he is asked to play.

Roberticus on July 4, 2011 at 4:36 am

Fully agree,

I’ll just add that when Messi drops SO deep and for such prolonged periods, it’s usually a symptom of the rest of the team struggling.

E@zy on July 3, 2011 at 3:01 am

You say Lavezzi, knows the system, so use him and Di Maria, who clearly knows how to play the wide winger role. He usually plays deeper than a wide forward because of Ronaldo being more offensive. Maybe it’s time he played more forward? He has the energy to close down quickly and Lavezzi should be doing the same already. Messi as false nine, Masch on his own, have Banega and Pastore. Banega should be more offensive then this performance.

That’s as close as Argentina can get to Barca personnel wise. However, the tempo, closing down philosphy is asking a lot for professional’s whoa re prety much set in their own ways.

Yang on July 3, 2011 at 8:05 am

Do Argi need tactic to beat Bolivia? I think that there exist huge skill gap between two teams. Argi team must rethink about team tactic. Why do they need to follow Spain NT plan? because Messi must be a legendary footballer?

DT on July 3, 2011 at 8:30 am

The Tevez conundrum…or headache for each one of his coaches. Interesting to see ZM’s choice of words “Tevez forced his way into the side”. As I understand it, Tevez is for Argentinian masses the closest to what Eva Peron used to be once upon a time. Every coach of the albiceleste knows that choosing to drop Tevez and happening to get (for whatever reason) a bad result will be a safe way to hell.

shame. a lot of promising young players. One swiss midfielder in 3 games had pass completions of 100%, 97% and 95%!

mrblond on July 3, 2011 at 2:16 pm

we’ll, Batista better figure out the best lineup for attack quickly b/c that back four is going to give up a bunch of goals. I like many here agree that the best lineup includes Pastore, dropping a defensive mid (Cambiasso) and forwards that can stay forward and wide of Messi (Kun and Di Maria/Lavezzi). Playing Cambiasso in place of Pastore, especially against Boliva, was a head scratching move.

It’s not that simple though. forwards that stay wide mean Messi as a false 9 creates space for nobody. They need to come central but that requires attacking fullbacks which then requires defensive mids. They need to try di maria and zanetti at fulback (incredibly unlikely) or switch to a 4-2-3-1 permanently so the wide players can stay wider so the fullbacks don’t need to get forward as much. This means Messi playing as a number 10 though rather than a false 9 and still means no place for Tevez as Higuian will have to come on as a classic 9 to stretch play for Messi rather than dropping deep and suffocating him.

Mati on July 3, 2011 at 3:31 pm

a terrible display of Argentinian football, a huge let down & tactical failure by Batista. this Portuguese way of playing 3 ball-winners/players is not working. this felt like a Barcelona game, where the opposition knows how to stop them without sitting deep for 90 minutes. huge props to Quinteros & his men, they knew how to stop Argentina from playing.

one major factor that stands out in this attempt by Checho to play like Barcelona is the use of fullbacks. how under-rated is Alves now? Checho made a mistake by calling up Tevez & succumbing to public pressure. with all due respect, if the shoe doesn’t fit…

just a few pointers, cuz I can’t be bothered to type in paragraphs

-Cambiasso was the only Arg midfielder bombing into the box, & with him off Arg became very predictable, playing the ball side to side with no surpirse element to penetrate
-Banega, immense player, but his game is limited by instructions to play the “Xavi-role”. he has to start on the left of midfield, where his passing will show, he can cover for the more attacking fullback Rojo, & play the ball out better
-Bolivia always pressed Banega because he is not comfortable playing on the right. his passing becomes limited & his speed exposed
-playing Lavezzi on the right & Di Maria on the left is counter-productive. neither can stretch play (which I’m assuming is the reason behind their respective positions), cross accurately (atleast not in this game) or cut & shoot on their weaker foot. Lavezzi’s best games with Napoli came from a second striker role dribbling diagonally from the left. same with Di Maria in his Benfica days
-Messi is being labelled a “false 9″ means he is not a 9!! the strikers need to occupy the space he creates & finish the chances he creates
-Checo has to play an Enganche. Argentina shouldn’t panic yet, but the team sheet is a bit confusing with no engache other than Pastore (bench) & Messi playing out of position (ok, false 9, but he drops way too much beecause the team lacks an “Iniesta” to complemet the “Xavi” if thats what Checho wants)
-Burdisso was OK for a change, Milito’s footwork saved him on a few occasions. Zanetti is consistant, but not spectacular. this system requires a spectacular RB
-Marcelo the Brazilian missed the chance of his life…made Tevez & Lavezzi’s fluffs look good
-hat off for Snr. Quinteros…you made the 2011 copa interesting!

Roberticus on July 4, 2011 at 3:55 am

Mati,

almost entirely agree with your analysis.

As you say, there’s little point in having two outside-forwards playing on their stronger foot when there is no reference (No.9) in the centre.

That being said, I do think that DiMaria is still perfect for stretching the attack on the left; he doesn’t even need to make that many diagonal runs. Remember that a key feature of his play for Benfica and Argentina since 2008 has been those wicked inswerving shots from his left outstep.

With Lavezzi, I’ll grant you that… Batista might as well have gone for a more direct forward such as Aguero or even Higuain/Tevez. Admitteldy they’re all right-footed, but these guys have the intelligence to interchange with Messi and DiMaria. I mean, did David Villa really appear all that static when playing from the right (on his stronger foot) in the Champs League final? There was sufficient fluidity between himself and Messi in the centre…even switching of flanks with Pedro so that not one forward grew listless or frustrated. Argentina have the playing personnel (up front at least) to accomplish this.

The enganche: I agree, to have one would be useful.
But is Pastore really a traditional foot-resting-on-the-ball enganche? To my mind he is an explosive player much like Kaká who streaks through the central channel… could this dovetail with Messi dropping back or would they get in each others’ way? I don’t know..but it’d be interesting to find out.

In fact, does Batista even have a classic enganche such as Brazil do with Ganso? As someone mentioned above you have a group of Argentine playmaking No.10s currently triumphing in Brazilian club football – D’Alessandro, Conca and Montilla to name but a few. One would be handy even to come off the bench. Unless Pastore finds an element of “pause” to his locomotive game, I fear Argentina will be lacking in this department.

The other possibility lies in Banega who for a period played as a 3/4ista with Boca Juniors. Admittedly he ended up refining his role and dropping back into the double pivot where he seems more comfortable with a greater expanse of the field straight in front of him – but he still does maintain some enganche characteristics. I’d argue that he is a lesser Deco (compared to the latter’s Porto-Barca years)who was good as an enganche but even better as an interior (roughly speaking an intermediate midfielder between holding mid and 3/4). In any case, whether Banega were to play as the deepest midfielder, a secondary-holder or a Barça-esque ‘interior’ along the right (better than on the left, as you well say).

In short, Argentina are too short of midfield options to exclude Banega from the set-up -wherever he does play.

Another question was the way Mascherano and Cambiasso staggered themselves whenever Argentina were in possession. Cambiasso is a better passer than is Mascherano, so logically he should be at the base of the play from the moment the ball is being brought out from Argentina’s back line. Mascherano in any case is more at ease when he is anticipating and disrupting opponents’ movements during the transition and for a possession based team like Argentina, this means he needs to disrupt early and relatively distant from his own defence. Of course for the purposes of fluidity and balance, Cambiasso may at times carry the ball forward and Mascherano then drop behind him to screen the defence, but the arrangement against Bolivia seemed to be more permanent than that; almost a Barça-esque [1+2] scenario with Cambiasso level with and assisting Banega higher up the pitch. As someone else has said, Cambiasso is no Iniesta, let alone a Xavi.
On top of that, it’s not as if Mascherano at DM is the same as having the rapid-fire passing of Busquets to keep the momentum of ball circulation high.

Really, I would sooner have Cambiasso – or Banega even! – as the deepest lying midfielder
…

-If with an enganche: then Banega (deepest) + Cambiasso and Masch (ahead) + Pastore (3/4ista). Unfortunately it’d mean dropping one of the forwards.

- If persisting with Messi as false 9 + two wide forwards, then Cambiasso at base with Masch (right) and Banega (left) slightly ahead.

- Naturally, in the ideal scenario Pastore* would come in for one of the midfielders as opposed to replacing one of the forwards, but I’m still not sure as to how cohesive his inclusion would make a three-man midfield.
If he must be included, then I think one of Masch/Cambiasso has to be left out… not Banega because he is still the only ‘regulating’ midfielder and with Pastore in there things could get hectic….which brings me to the next point.

-Mascherano as centre-back? Lord knows of the current Milito-Burdisso pairing neither is quick off the mark. Ideally, in a team like this you want to see in your CBs a Puyol-Pique-esque balance (stopper + libero); so Mascherano as the stopper and Milito as the libero? Not that Milito is near as composed as Pique.. but I’d trust him ahead of Burdisso with such a task.

* Personally, I don’t see Batista making structural alterations so early in the tournament and so I doubt Pastore will make the starting line-up.

marc on July 4, 2011 at 7:06 pm

I do not have much to argue on except one point- “But is Pastore really a traditional foot-resting-on-the-ball enganche? To my mind he is an explosive player much like Kaká who streaks through the central channel”

Your observation of Kaka is correct. He flourished in Milan thanks to a large contribution from Pirlo from the deep. He in fact struggles if he is given a couple of holding midfielders and asked to perform a Zidane-esque role of building the attack of the whole side/ dictating the whole offensive part of the game.
Pastore as much as I have seen, carries the Palermo attack on his own when in full form. He has good ball control, can do step-overs not only with the use of pace in counter attacking situations but also when he is tightly marked while trying to build up an attack, good at opening up defenses and finding partners with his passing. Quiet a cool customer. And while he is no Requelme in dictating the tempo, I feel he does have the ‘pause’ element as I have seen him ‘buy time’ in Palermo with effectiveness when required. In fact, if played and given full confidence of the coach, he can have much greater success in NT than club cause his role will be far more minimized and he does exhibit good link-up capability with Messi(and should be able to do the same with Kun). The big question IF he does play is how to facilitate him. Options are-
* Alongside Banega and Cambiasso/Masch in 4-3-3
* As one of the supporting strikers in 4-3-3
* Carry out the Ganso role in 4-2-1-3
* Play in the middle of the ‘3′ in 4-2-3-1

Whilst the Albiceleste can undoubtedly boost plethora of talents(to the extent that they can form a world beating side without Messi), it really is a daunting task to come out with a system that ensures threshold level utilization of resources and also to address the board and mass politics in a diplomatic yet uncompromising way.

Roberticus on July 5, 2011 at 4:38 am

Marc,

I have only occassionally watched Palermo so I’ll have to take your word on Pastore being more of a playmaker than a Kaka-figure.

Juse one point; much like Kaka, doesn’t Pastore benefit from a deep-lying playmaker behind him in the shape of Bacinovic? So he too is liberated from some of the playmaking responsibilities, is he not?

Who among the Argentina squad could replicate such a role?

As you said, with Milan it was the case that Pirlo could regulate the midfield with Kaka choosing to punctuate through his ‘verticality’.

Mati on July 5, 2011 at 12:58 pm

Rob’

always a pleasure discussing football with you. agree with most of what you say on this comment & the one below.

I only mentioned Pastore as the enganch because who else has Chechho called who can fill the obvious void? off the top of my head, how many “foot-on-the-ball” Argentinian enganches are left in this world? Andres D’Alessandro (inconsistant), Damian Manso (too old now), Marcelo Canete (injury-prone & inexperienced)…not much really, no? unfortunately, I haven’t seen much of Montillo, but the reviews sound good. from what I see in Argentinian football (maybe 3-4 games a month) the 10 these days comes in the form of Pastore (abroad) & Patricio Rodriguez (Independiente). quick, nimble dribblers who can pass. game controllers? since Riquelme & Veron are out of the equation, only Banega comes to mind.

your stopper + libero analysis is perfection, and linking it with the Mascherano/Cambiasso issue = how can Argentina play like Barcelona without a “Busquets”? he is the exit strategy, and only when there are no options / or enough openings will Pique advance. Cambiasso’s personality makes him the most likely to be dropped (afterall, it still is Masche +10, no?), but as you said, it’s hard to see Pastore getting a look-in, as Batista critisized Diego for hiting the panic button & going all out with the personnel changes during WC2010, and will try to avoid falling for that same mistake.

did you see Peru?

Roberticus on July 5, 2011 at 10:49 pm

Mati,

Amen to pretty much all of that.

Where are all the Argentine enganches? Certainly no longer playing among the elite in Europe; those Brazil-based ones we mentioned are probably the most reliably high-standard exponents. Batista did call up D’Alessandro for a friendly game a few months back… perhaps he’d be handy for the bench.

Veron? Game controller, certainly – but in the midfield general role, a bit like Banega in ths respect. Veron thrives when playing deeper – at Estudiantes, at Lazio et al and he was never really an enganche. I remember Bielsa mystifyingly used him in that function during the 2002 WC (after he’d spent many of the qualifiers playing as an anchorman) instead of a more nimble player like Aimar or Gallardo… when I saw Veron listed as 3/4 ista in the line-up before the England game, I could see the defeat coming.

No Argentine Busquets – good observation.. how do you go about imitating Barcelona (politically stupid comments from Batista there*)without a Busquets? For me Cambiasso is closer to Busquets than is Masch, and even so that~s still quite a difference.

* = Nothing wring with Batista incorporating much/all of Barcelona format on the training ground; but dear lord, at least have the good sense (as has Mascherano) to downplay it in public. Checho is darning that rope with which to hang himself

Roberticus on July 5, 2011 at 10:52 pm

No, aorry – didn~t see Peru

Daniel on July 4, 2011 at 1:29 am

First of all, I want to apoligize if my english isn’t good enough (it is not my mother langage).

Secondly in my opinion the bigger problem with Argentina is the coach. He has tremendous players, but he doesn’t know how to use them. Messi has already demonstrated that he is not the same in Argentina than in Barcelona, so maybe the problem is because there are not the same players but Batista somehow doesn’t see it. Argentina desn’t have the full backs (players like Dani Alves) to allow Messi to play as a false 9. We don’t have Xavi either but I do not think Pastore is so unqualified to fit the role of playmaker. This is I think the big problem in Argentina’s midfield. Banega, Cambiasso and Mascherano did a good match in the defensive role, but they are not natural creators. They are not the link between midfield and attack that Messi needs to perform well. If you recall, the only times Messi has played well for Argentina where when there was somebody in the midfield to organise the game and dictate the tempo: either Riquelme or Veron during the world cup, and in a lesser way the little time Pastore and Messi had played together in the match against Greece, again during the world cup.

Third, Argentina system is too predictable. The absence of a real “9″ obligates all the attacks to pass throught the middle. The few time Zanetti or Rojo made it until the corner line, they didn’t threw a single cross because there is now one who could catch it. If Batista really want’s to play with wingers like Di Maria (who is great in that role) or Lavezzi (even thought he is not a natural winger) he has to put someone in the center. I don’t think Milito or Higuain lack of talent to do that. In fact the gol of Argentina came from a center that was “dropped down” (I don’t know the exact term) buy Burdisso in a forward fashion. I don’t think a coach should underestimate the value of aerial game just because it dosen’t fit the philosophy of “el toque” or because Barcelona doesn’t use that weapon.

Fourth, the Argentina defense. It is now too late for Batista to change the list but I cannot understand how a coach can base his defense on a player like Milito who hasn’t play more than 3 consecutive match this season. It is one of the role s in football (along with the goalkeeper) where I think you cannot improvise, there are too many resposabilites, the players must be sharp because a single error can lead to a goal. However I am not sure that putting Mascherano as a central back, as many have said, is a viable solution. It is one think to do this in a team like Barcelona where you have nearly 70% of ball possetion and where a great deal of the defensive work has been done by the rest of the team than in a team like Argentina where the whole team relies on you. As I said before, Argentina doesn’t have world class full backs but Zanetti in the left and Zabaleta in the right should be more than enough. Rojo not being a natural full back, it is unfair to expect lots of forward runs from him.

Finally, the inclusion of Tevez. On this point I agree with Batista but not entirely. I think leaving him out would have been a great mistake, beacuse even thought Argentina has great strikers I do not think leaving the goalscorer of such a difficult league as the premier is a good idea. But titularising him neither since he hasn’t been part of this one year process, it is logical it takes time for him to accomodate. A first change option would have been better. But if you analise the whole match he hasn’t been so catastrophical either. Nor has been Lavezzi. The failure of Argentina was in the midfield, there was simply no connection between the forwards and the midfielders obligating Messi to drop down to get the ball, an error that has been fatal to Argentina during the world cup.

Finally I propose you my ideal team, you can see it as a classic 4-3-3 or a more modern 4-2-3-1 :
___________Romero

Zabaleta___Burdisso__Milito__Zanetti

Cambiasso__Mascherano__Pastore

Messi__Higuain__Tevez/Aguero

I cannot decide between Aguero and Tevez, but in think one must be the first change of the other in case the attack doesn’t work.

I think Argentina should forget about trying to replicate the Barca system. The key word there is ’system’, you can set your team up with a similar formation as Barca, but how the system is implemented is the key to their success, along with their personnel.

Personally I think Argentina should get back to a more basic system – 4-4-1-1. A target man up front who can hold the play up i.e. D.Milito With someone playing in between the lines – Messi. 4 in Midfield with Di Maria as a Left Winger, Lavezzi on the right(not the best choice I know), and Banega/Cambiasso in the center (I prefer Cambiasso as he is a better passer than Mascherano while still being combative in midfield).

Argentina’s problem is their coach. How can he play 3 DM’s and expect one of them to be a play maker. He keeps on saying, he doesnt want Messi to come back to his half, but what is he doing to prevent that. Putting extremely individualistic players like Tevez and Lavezzi by his side is suicidal. Argentina has too many stars. And most of them want to prove they are even better than Messi. Even Zanetti wanted to dribble out 3/4 and go forward all the way. Except Messi, Masch and Banega, nobody wasnt interested in the passing game.

I really feel sorry for Messi.

It would be better to take out Milito, play Masch at the CB, Cambiasso at the DM.

I feel sorry that with this kind of team and tactics, Argentina would not even make the semis. Seeing how even a 10 man Costa rica played Columbia, this is going to be a very tough tournament for them.

marc on July 4, 2011 at 6:31 pm

Banega is NOT a DM. Argies were playing with 2. However, Banega is not the playmaker as well.

Galvez on July 6, 2011 at 7:30 am

The problem with Argentina is that they have the top scorer of the EPL (Tevez) and the best player of La Liga (Messi), so the coach feels he has to play them both at the same time, but Messi and Tevez are completely incompatible.

Their roles partially overlap, and interfere with each other.

An Argentina with Pastore and Milito in place of Messi and Tevez would be better. Although, all things said, no CONMEBOL team is a minnow, so credit should be given to Bolivia who, when all is said, were closer to winning this one than Argentina.